Quote Originally Posted by arlington View Post
IMHO, for the image of the sport the rule has to stay. Certainly not suggesting anything untoward if the rule was changed and drivers didn't back all of their drives but the general betting public have concerns about selective bets. Steward's enquiries into performance indifferences would nearly always have to start with questioning a driver's betting record on that race. Would need to be made public via Steward's reports in every instance. "Yes Sir/Madam, I did back that drive". "No Sir/Madam" I didn't back that one". How does the public interpret that? So I guess until the Greyhound authorities employ a Dr Dolittle "place your right paw on the bible and swear..."
Would be even more disturbing, and confronting, if a new rule needed to incorporate parameters regarding a driver laying their horse!
You have just about swayed me with this argument Wayne. I do believe however that if it does stay, then it has to be enforced properly ie you cannot have 'mum' putting the bet on for you which then follows that drivers families' betting may come into question and it all starts to get ridiculous (a la AFL) SO I think we are better off not pretending and should change the rule to - you can only bet on the horse you are driving. If this becomes a standard question in investigating driving tactics then so be it. If drivers made us much as AFL players, I would be all for enforcing the rule strictly